Vadim Belman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:53:50PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > > It doesn't seem unreasonable to have a single file with a list of allowable > > shells. > It does if you think of mergemaster, for example. With any upgrade > it consider /etc/shells as changed and prompts for replacing/merging/etc. No. Mergemaster doesn't care about the contents of the file, only about its $FreeBSD$ tag. As long as this stays the same, it'll leave the file alone. If you remove the $FreeBSD$ tag in the installed file or someone commits to src/etc/shells, mergemaster will prompt you. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Louis A. Mamakos
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... John Baldwin
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Matt Dillon
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Vadim Belman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Dag-Erling Smorgrav
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax ... sig
- Re: /etc/shells #include syn... Mike Meyer
- Re: /etc/shells #include... Sean O'Connell
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Garrett Wollman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith